"Fox News Sunday" is heading to Louisville, Ky. Jack Conway, Kentucky's attorney general and the Democratic candidate for Senate , and Rand Paul, the Republican nominee and son of Representative Ron Paul, Republican of Texas, have agreed to a live debate on "Fox News Sunday" on Oct.3 at 9 a.m. (Eastern time).

Join the discussion below, or Read more at thecaucus.blogs.nytimes.com.

People change, laws change, the ownership of a gun is quite different from carrying . Zimmerman is unstable? Don`t know, but agree he pushed the envelope here. The law of "stand your ground" is great until something like this case comes along. Mistakes were made by both parties, is my opinion.But my opinion is just that, and no more . I was not there.

People change, laws change, the ownership of a gun is quite different from carrying . Zimmerman is unstable? Don`t know, but agree he pushed the envelope here. The law of "stand your ground" is great until something like this case comes along. Mistakes were made by both parties, is my opinion.But my opinion is just that, and no more . I was not there.

<quoted text>Most will not tell their Party and also will not commit, so not able to name anyone.My saying a light sentence is also not telling what a "light" sentence would be. Both parties here were in the wrong.The law of "stand your ground" leaves me questioning , pertaining to sentence. Any thoughts?

Stand Your Ground would be Martin then since Zimmerman was following/pursuing Martin.

I ask again.... What mistake did Martin make?? I'm waiting to hear this one.

If the situation had been tolerable , then he should have stated why he was there and where he lived and not gotten into a fight. Being confronted does not set the stage for fighting unless attacked. None have indicated this happened . Maybe this came out in the trial , but haven`t heard of it.

<quoted text>If the situation had been tolerable , then he should have stated why he was there and where he lived and not gotten into a fight. Being confronted does not set the stage for fighting unless attacked. None have indicated this happened . Maybe this came out in the trial , but haven`t heard of it.

Stated why he was there?? To who? And why should he have had to tell anyone why he was there?

<quoted text>Stand Your Ground would be Martin then since Zimmerman was following/pursuing Martin.I ask again.... What mistake did Martin make?? I'm waiting to hear this one.

This is where "stand your ground ' would be misinterpreted/My understanding was it referred to when someone broke into your home. Not stand your ground in a sidewalk confronting.Now if you turned this around, and Martin was the armed person , and shot Zimmerman, this is not standing your ground, again my opinion. This is why my conclusion is both were in the wrong. If Martin had simply taken his time and had a conversation with Zimmerman rather than fighting, it could have turned out differently. Same thing with Zimmerman, if he had stayed in the truck, done as advised, none of this would have happened.

<quoted text>This is where "stand your ground ' would be misinterpreted/My understanding was it referred to when someone broke into your home. Not stand your ground in a sidewalk confronting.Now if you turned this around, and Martin was the armed person , and shot Zimmerman, this is not standing your ground, again my opinion. This is why my conclusion is both were in the wrong. If Martin had simply taken his time and had a conversation with Zimmerman rather than fighting, it could have turned out differently. Same thing with Zimmerman, if he had stayed in the truck, done as advised, none of this would have happened.

Stand Your Ground is Stand Your Ground. No matter where you are in Florida.

And why would he need to explain ANYTHING to Zimmerman?? I've asked this question 3 times??

Line good thing about the Zimmerman trial, there's a nurse in the jury. That nurse will know that the head injuries aren't as bad as Zimmerman made them out to be. The nurse will also know that someone who is struggling in a fight would have issues reaching for a gun, it would be very difficult to unholster and shoot someone dead center in the heart.

If Zimmerman was on the ground defending himself, Martin would have probably been shot in the side wouldn't he?? How can Zimmerman on the ground, Martin on top of him fighting get the gun past arms without shooting the arms of Martin? It's possible yes, but the easiest shot since the gun is on your side is a side shot to the attacker.

Unless the fight was over.... That's what I'm guessing. Shot him after he got his ass beat.

Plus in the ground and pound position, martins knees would have been covering the side arm, making it more difficult for Zimmerman to reach. Unless of course the gun was already draw. That's probably what happened.

But in earlier reports, it was said that the people in the complex there had experienced several break-ins. They requested of management, more security, especially at night. Perhaps they should have spent the money on more secure lighting. But they did not. Instead they hired night security watch. Zimmerman's big mistake when he saw someone on the grounds was to assume someone walking was casing the place. Did he actually see Trayvon coming from a convenient store munching on something and with a drink in his hand, as has been stated in the earlier reports? Since it was raining, did he wonder why anyone would be out walking in this weather, and assume something fishy? It appears so.

Night security - to anybody - should have called out.....something like this: "Security, may I ask your business here"? As a night guard he had a right to ask this question. Trayvon - or anybody for that matter who uses their head would assume night security would have a weapon on them. All Trayvon had to say was, "I'm visiting XYZ, my parents, etc., family in complex #XYZ. I'm on my way home."

Zimmerman had backup coming, he should have stood back and allowed them to get there. None of this would have happened if both had not assumed so much, and Trayvon had not doubled back.

Way too many questions and mistakes, assumptions and fear in the night. I can see both their sides as to why this happened, why can't you?

I also wonder when management hired Z, did they do a background check on him? If they did not, they are responsible for this disaster, too. No, Z, should not ever own a gun again. He should not get off scott-free. But it's up to the jury, who has heard first-hand. That's why they are the jury of his peers.

Zimmerman did not identify himself. That was in court last week. Prosecution witness' said he had at least two chances to identify himself to Martin but he did not. So Martin doesn't have to stop for anyone..... Could have been someone crazy who had a gun.(Not a reference to Zimmerman) so he just kept walking. After Zimmerman not identifying himself and continuously following Martin, I'm sure he didn't want some crazy stranger that may have a gun following him home, or he doubled back to get away from a stranger who DID NOT IDENTIFY HIMSELF!

And one of our fundelmendal rights as Americans is Innocent Until Proven Guilty. Walking thru your dads girlfriends condo property is not a crime. Following someone for no reason is against the law.

Lastly, I've mentioned this many times.... Zimmerman studied Stand Your Ground Law. He thought he was covered. I think that's a big issue and he had other motives in mind. Just my thoughts.

Zimmerman had no right to confront Martin, he was told by 911 to not follow him. StandbYour Ground backs Martin, not Zimmerman.

Tell me when this thread is updated:

Add your comments below

Please note by submitting this form you acknowledge that you have read the Terms of Service and the comment you are posting is in compliance with such terms. Be polite.
Inappropriate posts may be removed by the moderator. Send us your feedback.